Death Row Blog
I recently read an article in the Toronto Star care of Reuters about a Death Row inmate who has been blogging about being on Death Row leading up to his imminent execution most likely for this coming Wednesday. He is convicted of killing 3 people. Two when he was 19 and one in his prison cell, in self-defense he says. That is not an easy thing
( Read more... )
"I decided I would only allow comments from those who were sympathetic to Rogelio or those who perhaps were not but were genuinely interested in having a serious conversation about the Death Penalty, or wished to pose a question to Rogelio."
But he did decide to delete hateful comments which I can imagine would be anything worse than "burn in hell" and given that the prisoner is scheduled to be put to death in a couple of days I think that is more than fair.
As for school children sending in their praise of a 3-time killer I think it must be remembered that many of them are responding to what they are reading on the page which as far as I can tell appears to be a portrait of a truly penitent person whose trying to come to terms with his own death. Children being more impressionable are less likely to weigh complex morals of right and wrong so long as what they see is written in black and white. Therefore they are not seeing a 3 time killer when they look from his perspective. I'm sure they would write with the same empathy if they were to read a blog that belonged to one of the victim's family members.
I have heard extensively about innocent people who have been executed and I still stand that by that 2 wrongs do not make a right, no matter how packed the jails get-- that is a social problem that needs to be worked on from the outside before people end up doing something stupid that lands them on death row. The only thing that I'm really satisfied with is that executions have become more humane and less of a freak show to sate the revengeful.
I am curious though as to what exactly churned your stomach about his blog-- that he is asking for forgiveness or that he is not facing up to his consequences?
Reply
I guess what I'm having a hard time with is that I'm interpreting sympathy towards the killer as a slap in the face to his victims. The Toronto Star article doesn't go into a lot of detail about the circumstances surrounding the murders, and the the third one sounds like it could have been self defense, but the first two seemed particularly senseless and brutal. And no amount of the killer feeling sorry (for his victims, or for himself) is going to bring the people back.
It's nice that he has the luxury of being able to come to terms with his death before it happens, because the people he killed certaily didn't. For me, that's really what it comes down to. I think taking someone's life in cold blood is the most heinous, evil crime that anyone can possibly commit, which is why I said in my earlier post that it's the only crime I could see the death penalty being suitable for, eye for an eye style. (Not like in the old days where people were executed for things like treason or even stealing.)
Which begs the question, is evoking the death penalty an equally cold-blooded act, or does the punishment fit the crime. I think it's possible to make restitution for a lot of criminal acts, but, again, murder is permanent, and no amount of penitence or community service can ever reverse the damage done.
Here's some more food for thought: is it the fact that death penalties are decreed by judges and carried out by the state that makes people uncomfortable, because we're somehow institutionalizing killing? Or would people feel the same way if the father of the 13-year-old victim of this man had taken a shotgun and blown her killer's head off the day after he found out about it, in rage- and grief-fueled revenge? Would we still feel so uncomfortable over the man's death, or would we think to ourselves that justice was served?
Reply
Yanked from Amnesty International:
As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated.
The death penalty:
* denies the possibility of rehabilitation and reconciliation.
* promotes simplistic responses to complex human problems, rather than pursuing explanations that could inform positive strategies.
* prolongs the suffering of the murder victim’s family, and extends that suffering to the loved ones of the condemned prisoner.
* diverts resources and energy that could be better used to work against violent crime and assist those affected by it.
* is a symptom of a culture of violence, not a solution to it. It is an affront to human dignity.
* should be abolished. Now.
Eighty eight percent of all known executions in 2007 took place in five countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the USA.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment